Frear Park Ice Rink Playground Addendum 01.pdf

ENGINEER’S ADDENDUM NO. 01

TO THE BID DOCUMENTS (PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS) FOR

CHA Project Number: 106348

Frear Park Development Ice Rink Playground

Rensselaer County, New York October 8, 2026

The following changes and/or additions shall be made to the plans and/or specifications. All other requirements of the contract documents shall remain the same. Acknowledge receipt of this addendum by inserting its number and date in the Bid Proposal.

Changes/Additions to the Bid Documents:

THIS ADDENDUM is hereby made a part of the contract documents on the subject work as though originally included therein. The following amendments, additions and/or corrections shall govern this work.

This Addendum is in the following parts as follows:

Part I - Pertaining to Drawings Part II - Pertaining to Specifications Part III - Clarifications/Responses to Contractor Questions Part IV - List of Attachments

PART I - PERTAINING TO DRAWINGS

Additional design scope has been provided: A double barrier gate and (2) pipe bollards have been added to the parking lot.

Additional clarification has been provided: The material schedule has been clarified regarding grill selection. The location of the existing and future meter pits and guidance related to the site water lines have been updated based on observed existing conditions and conversations with City departments.

Modifications have been made to drawings C-1.002, C-1.101, C-1.102, C-1.201, C-502, C-503

PART II - PERTAINING TO SPECIFICATIONS

Request For Bids – GENERAL CONDITIONS

- Item 8.0 CONTRACT PERIOD Remove “All work shall be substantially complete by December 31,2026” and Replace with “All work shall be substantially complete by December 18, 2026”

- Item 27.0 PREVAILING WAGE RATES Remove PRC #2026001057 and Replace with PRC #2026027336

Add the following Sections

- Section 003100 Available Project Information

RFB 26-0011

Frear Park Development – Ice Rink Playground Addendum 1

PART III – CLARIFICATIONS/RESPONSES TO CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS

During our review of this project, we noticed the following item in the "Request for Bid" document that we'd like clarification on (see Below):

"16.0 APPRENTICESHIP:

Resolution #72 dated October 3, 2019, requires any Contractor or Sub-Contractor of the City entering into a construction contract with a total dollar amount of $100,000 or more to have a NYS Commissioner of Labor approved Apprenticeship Program in place. This resolution shall apply to construction contracts advertised for bid on or after November 1, 2019.”

We are a Non-Union/Open Shop company and do not have a "NYS Commissioner of Labor approved Apprenticeship Program in place" unfortunately.

1. Is this a hard requirement in regard to providing a proposal for this work?

a. If so, is it fair to assume you will only be accepting proposals from

Union Contractors?

Response: The Apprenticeship Program is required by City of Troy resolution as described in the section quoted above. Bidders need not be union contractors but they must pay the prevailing wage, see the prevailing wage schedule PRC #2026027336.

I’m reviewing the bid documents for the Frear Park Development – Ice Rink Playground project and was hoping you could provide some clarification regarding the playground surfacing.

I see accessible playground surfacing referenced in the project scope, but I have not been able to locate information in the plans identifying the specified surfacing system (PIP rubber, synthetic turf, etc.), required thicknesses/fall heights, or surfacing colors.

2. Could you please let me know if this information is located elsewhere in the bid documents or if additional surfacing specifications/details will be provided?

We are interested in providing pricing for the playground surfacing scope and want to make sure we are pricing the intended system correctly.

Response: Safety surface is shown in drawings for coordination with Parkitects, the company installing the playground. This surfacing and its buildup are not in the bid.

3. Who will be the CM of the project?

Response: There will not be a person operating as the Construction Manager. Schedule coordination between contractors will be provided by the Owner’s Representative.

4. Will PEM concrete be required for this project?

Response: Concrete should meet the specifications provided.

RFB 26-0011

Frear Park Development – Ice Rink Playground Addendum 1

5. Has the contractor for the playground and splash pad been selected? If so, can you please verify the limits of their scope?

Response: The contractor for the playground and splash pad has been selected. Their scope includes:

playground equipment, splash pad equipment, playground safety surface, splash pad concrete, plumbing for the splash pad from the point of connection in a nearby manhole, purchase and installation of benches and picnic tables. The concrete curbs adjacent to the safety surfaces are to be installed by the winning bidder of the RFB 26-0011 contract.

6. Do the other contractors have a schedule for the spring of 2027? For coordination with the surface site work.

Response: No

7. Is there a specific basis of design for the proposed grills? .

Response: Yes. The City of Troy Parks Standards Manual identifies the grill on page 27 in the following way :

• Grill shall be permanently installed charcoal grill

• Grill shall have adjustable height grate and rotatable

• Grill shall be rust resistant

• Grill shall be 30”Lx20”Wx10”H

• Grill shall be ULINE product #H-6580, or approved equal

PART IV – LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Drawings

- C-1.002

- C-1.101

- C-1.102

- C-1.201

- C-502

- C-503

- Specifications

- Section 003100 Available Project Information o Geotechnical Engineering Report

END OF ENGINEER’S ADDENDUM

Date: October 8th, 2026 Submitted by: Rebecca Lederer, RLA, CHA Consulting, Inc.

AVAILABLE PROJECT INFORMATION PAGE 1 OF 1

CHA PROJECT NO. 106348

V:\ProjectSpecs\106348.000\Final\Frear Park Playgrounds Bid Submittal - Done\Addendum 1 - Current\00 31 00 Available Project Information.docx SECTION 00 31 00

AVAILABLE PROJECT INFORMATION

INFORMATION PLACED IN THIS SECTION IS NOT A PART OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.

SUBSURFACE DATA

1. A number of test borings were taken in the vicinity of the work. The location of these borings are shown on the Plans.

2. Logs of the test borings referred to above are included in the Contract Documents; but are not a part of the Contract Documents. The availability of these borings is not intended to relieve Bidders of their obligation to make a thorough investigation of conditions below the surface of the ground and neither additional payment nor an extension of time will be made to the Contractor because the borings referred to above do not accurately represent the true nature of the subsurface conditions.

3. Bidders and prospective Bidders are hereby warned and put on notice that the borings referred to above were made for design purposes only. They were not made for the purpose of informing Bidders and prospective Bidders as to subsurface conditions in the area of the work covered by this Contract and are not, in the opinion of the Engineer, sufficient or extensive enough to provide an accurate or reliable indication of subsurface conditions which might be encountered in the performance of this Contract.

4. Neither the Owner nor the Engineer has made any investigation of subsurface conditions in the area covered by the work to be performed under this Contract other than the borings referred to above, and, in bidding on this Contract, each Bidder acknowledges that he has made whatever investigation of subsurface conditions he had deemed necessary for the purpose of bidding. Permission for making borings of subsurface conditions will be arranged for by the Engineer upon receipt of a written request therefor.

5. Soil borings taken in July 2026 .

Soil report completed September 2026 .

Prepared by CHA Consulting, Inc. .

Geotechnical Engineering Report is attached on the following pages for reference only. Areas most relevant to this project are identified as or associated with the “Ice Rink Playground.”

GEOTECHNICAL

ENGINEERING

REPORT

FREAR PARK COMPLEX IMPROVEMENTS

TROY, NEW YORK

CHA Project Number: 106348.000

September 2026

Prepared for:

City of Troy, New York 433 River Street, 5th Floor

Troy, New York 12180

Prepared by:

CHA Consulting, Inc.

3 Winners Circle, Suite 100 Albany, NY 12205

Phone: (518) 453-4500

This document is intended for the use of the individual or entity for which it was prepared and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this document is strictly prohibited.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

PAGE i

CITY OF TROY, NEW YORK | FREAR PARK COMPLEX IMPROVEMENTS

CHA PROJECT NUMBER 106348.000

SIGNATURE PAGE

This report has been prepared by the following qualified engineers employed by CHA.

Roonak Ghaderi, EIT Printed Name of Preparing Engineer

Project Engineer IV Title of Preparing Engineer

Signature of Preparing Engineer

Charles W. Symmes, P.E Printed Name of Reviewing Engineer

Principal Geotechnical Engineer Title of Reviewing Engineer

Signature of Reviewing Engineer

IT IS A VIOLATION OF LAW FOR

ANY PERSON, UNLESS THEY ARE

ACTING UNDER THE DIRECTION

OF A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL

ENGINEER TO ALTER AN ITEM IN

ANY WAY. IF AN ITEM BEARING

THE STAMP OF A LICENSED

PROFESSIONAL IS ALTERED, THE

ALTERING ENGINEER SHALL

STAMP THE DOCUMENT AND

INCLUDE THE NOTATION

"ALTERED BY" FOLLOWED BY

THEIR SIGNATURE, THE DATE OF

SUCH ALTERATION, AND A

SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF THE

ALTERATION.

Symmes, Charles Charles W. Symmes

Symmes, Charles Seal/Sig

PAGE ii

CHA PROJECT NUMBER 106348.000

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

2 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 Existing Condition

2.1.1 Pavilion Building

2.1.2 Ice Rink Playground

2.1.3 North Lake Playground

2.2 Proposed Development

2.2.1 Pavilion Building

2.2.2 Ice Rink Playground

2.2.3 North Lake Playground

3 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND TESTING

3.1 Subsurface Exploration

3.1.1 Borings

3.1.2 Infiltration Testing

3.2 Laboratory Testing

4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.1 Regional Geology

4.2 Subsurface Stratigraphy

4.2.1 Pavilion Building

4.2.2 Ice Rink Playground

4.2.3 North Lake Playground

4.3 Groundwater Conditions

4.4 Laboratory Test Results

5 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Shallow Foundations

5.2 Retaining Walls

5.3 Seismic Considerations

5.4 Floor Slabs

5.5 Groundwater and Groundwater Control

5.6 Site Preparation

5.7 Structural Fill

6 EXCAVATIONS

7 OBSERVATION DURING CONSTRUCTION

8 CLOSURE

9 REFERENCES

PAGE iii

CHA PROJECT NUMBER 106348.000

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1.2-1. Infiltration Test Results Table 5.7-1. Gradation Requirements for Structural Fill

Table 1 Summary of Laboratory Rest Results

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Site Location Plan Figure 2 Boring Location Plan Figure 3 Limits of Structural Fill Detail

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Photographs Appendix B Boring Logs Appendix C Laboratory Test Results

PAGE iv

LIST OF ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS

AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ASTM ASTM International BGS Below the Ground Surface CHA CHA Consulting, Inc.

FHWA Federal Highway Administration FJC Flush Joint Casing HSA Hollow Stem Auger NYSDOT New York State Department of Transportation OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration PVC Polyvinyl Chloride RQD Rock Quality Designation QA Quality Assurance QC Quality Control SPT Standard Penetration Test USGS United States Geological Survey WOH Weight of Hammer WOR Weight of Rods

FPS Feet per Second KSF Kips per Square Foot KSI Kips per Square Inch PCI Pounds per Cubic Inch PCF Pounds per Cubic Foot PSI Pounds per Square Inch

\\cha-llp.com\proj\Projects\ANY\K7\106348.000\08_Reports\Geotechnical\106348 - Geotechnical Report - Frear

Park.docx

1 INTRODUCTION

CHA was retained by the City of Troy to perform geotechnical engineering services for the proposed Frear Park improvements in Troy, New York.

The primary objectives of the geotechnical services were to explore the subsurface conditions at the project site, provide geotechnical recommendations for the design of the proposed pavilion building and playgrounds, and to prepare a report documenting these items.

Subsurface explorations were completed at the locations of the proposed improvements, including the new pavilion building, Ice Rink Playground, North Lake Playground, locker room/restroom addition, and cart storage area. Although the proposed locker room/restroom addition and cart storage area are no longer being advanced as part of the current project scope and are therefore not addressed in this report, the corresponding subsurface exploration data and boring logs have been included herein for reference.

2 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 Existing Conditions

The project sites are located within Frear Park in Troy, New York. Existing conditions within the proposed development areas are described below.

The project site location is shown on Figure 1 – Site Location Plan. The proposed development areas are shown on Figure 2, Boring Location Plan.

2.1.1 Pavilion Building

The proposed pavilion building area is bounded by the existing restaurant and ice rink building to the north, Lavin Court to the east, Park Boulevard to the south, and grassed and wooded areas to the west.

The proposed Pavilion Building area generally comprises existing grassed and paved surfaces and includes portions of the existing restaurant and ice rink building. Site topography within this portion of the site generally slopes downward from north to south. Existing ground surface elevations across the proposed building footprint range from approximately Elevation 281 feet along the northern portion of the site to approximately Elevation 270 feet along the southern portion.

2.1.2 Ice Rink Playground

The proposed Ice Rink playground area is bounded by Frear Park Road to the north and east, the existing parking area and ice rink building to the south, and grassed and wooded areas to the west.

This area is currently occupied by an existing playground, associated playground equipment, grassed areas, and several mature trees. Existing ground surface elevations within the proposed playground area range from approximately Elevation 285 feet along the eastern side of the site to approximately Elevation 290 feet near the northern portion of the area.

2.1.3 North Lake Playground

The proposed North Lake Playground and associated stormwater management area is bounded by an existing parking lot and wooded areas to the north, North Lake Avenue to the east, and grassed and wooded areas to the south and west.

CHA PROJECT NUMBER 106348.000

The area currently consists primarily of grassed areas with scattered trees. Existing ground surface elevations across the proposed playground and stormwater management area range from approximately Elevation 375 feet along the western portion of the site to approximately Elevation

385 feet along the eastern portion

2.2 Proposed Development

The proposed development includes construction of a new pavilion building, new playground facilities, and associated stormwater management features within the project areas. The primary project components are summarized below.

2.2.1 Pavilion Building

A pavilion building is proposed immediately south of the existing ice rink building. The proposed structure will consist of a one-story, wood-framed building with an approximate footprint area of

5,100 square feet and a finished floor elevation of approximately Elevation 281.85 feet. The maximum load on the strip footings is 1,300 pounds per lineal foot, and the maximum column load at the building deck is 10 kips. The live load on the building floor slab is 100 psf. Construction of the proposed building will require demolition of a portion of the existing ice rink structure and the existing restaurant building.

To achieve the proposed finished floor elevation, approximately 1 foot of fill will be required in the northern portion of the building footprint and up to approximately 12 feet of fill will be required in the southern portion. A terrace is proposed along the south side of the building.

2.2.2 Ice Rink Playground

The existing playground located north of the ice rink building will be demolished and replaced with a new playground facility. Site grading associated with the playground improvements is anticipated to be minor.

2.2.3 North Lake Playground

A new playground is proposed near North Lake Avenue, but this part of the project is not advancing at this time. Minor grading will likely be required in this area if this project progresses.

A new parking area was planned immediately north of the proposed playground and a stormwater management area was planned to the west of the playground.

3 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND TESTING

3.1 Subsurface Exploration

3.1.1 Borings

CHA conducted a subsurface exploration from July 20 to July 23, 2026. The exploration included

15 borings and two infiltration testings. The borings were designated as B-01 through B-11, B-

01A, B-05A, B-06A and B-06B extending to depths of 5 to 24.1 feet BGS. The boring locations are shown on Figure 2 – Boring Location Plan. Photographs of drilling operations and boring locations are included in Appendix A.

The borings were marked in the field by CHA prior to the subsurface exploration by measuring from physical features at the site and a GPS device. The final locations and ground surface elevations of the borings were obtained using RTK GPS after drilling. The locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used to determine them.

Atlantic Testing Laboratories (ATL) was retained by CHA to advance the borings. The borings were advanced with an ATV- mounted Geoprobe 7822DT drill rig using HSA or FJC with an inside diameter of 2.25 inches and 4 inches, respectively. SPT and split barrel sampling was generally performed continuously to 10 feet BGS and at standard 5-foot sampling intervals thereafter.

Sampling was performed in general accordance with ASTM Standard D1586 “Standard Test

Method for Standard Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils.” The split barrel samples were advanced using an automatic 140 (+/-) pound trip hammer falling 30 (+/-) inches. “Blow counts” are recorded on the boring logs and indicate the penetration resistance for a 6-inch advancement of the split barrel. The barrel is initially driven 6 inches to seat the sampler in undisturbed material. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the next 12 inches is taken as the SPT resistance or N-value. This value is indicative of the in-place density or consistency of the soil. The final 6-inch increment that the sampler is driven is not included in the determination of the N-value. Sample refusal is defined as a greater resistance than 50 blows per

6 inches of penetration.

An NX size core barrel was used to obtain a bedrock core sample in general conformance with

ASTM Standard D2113 “Standard Practice for Rock Core Drilling and Sampling of Rock for Site

Investigation.” Rock core was obtained in Boring B-06B from 7 feet to 12 feet BGS. The RQD value was then determined in the field for each core sample in general conformance with ASTM

Standard D6032 “Standard Test Method for Determining Rock Quality Designation (RQD) of Rock

Core.” RQD is defined as the sum of the length of core pieces 4 inches and longer, divided by the

CHA PROJECT NUMBER 106348.000

length of the core run, expressed as a percentage. Fractures within the core sample that are deemed to be the result of the drilling process are ignored when computing the RQD. The RQD values provide an indication of the relative degree of jointing or fracturing of the bedrock. A photograph of the rock core obtained is included in Appendix A.

CHA geotechnical or environmental staff observed the subsurface exploration to verify that proper drilling methods were used, describe soil and rock samples, and prepare field logs documenting the sampling, testing, and subsurface conditions. Geotechnical staff reviewed the samples and descriptions after the completion of the field work.

Borings were backfilled with soil cuttings and patched at the surface with asphalt cold patch in paved areas, upon completion.

3.1.2 Infiltration Testing

Two infiltration tests, designated IT-10 and IT-11, were conducted within borings advanced adjacent to Borings B-10 and B-11, respectively. The testing was completed in accordance with the procedures outlined in the New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual.

The results of the infiltration testing are summarized in Table 3.1.2-1 below.

Table 3.1.2-1. Infiltration Test Results

Infiltration Test ID

Adjacent Boring

ID

Test Depth (feet)

Test Elevation

(feet)

Infiltration Rate (inch/hour)

1 2 3 4

IT-101 B-10 5.5 370.7 - - - -

IT-11 B-11 5.3 370.5 3.2 3.9 4.3 4.6

Note: 1- Water level did not drop during presoak overnight and test was abandoned.

3.2 Laboratory Testing

CHA subcontracted Atlantic Testing Laboratories (ATL) to perform the following laboratory testing on select soil and rock samples collected during the subsurface exploration.

• Moisture Content – ASTM D2216

• Atterberg Limits – ASTM D4318

• Sieve Analysis – ASTM D6913

• Uniaxial Compressive Strength of Rock – ASTM D7012

4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

The subsurface conditions at the project areas moving forward at this time are summarized below based on a review of published geologic maps and the results of the borings and laboratory testing performed for this project.

4.1 Regional Geology

According to the Surficial Geologic Map of New York, Hudson-Mohawk Sheet, surface soil at the proposed pavilion building and ice rink playground areas consists of lacustrine silt and clay, consisting of generally laminated silt and clay deposited in proglacial lakes; The surface soil at the North Lake playground area is mapped as outwash sand and gravel, comprising coarse- to fine-grained gravel and sand deposited by glacial meltwater streams.

According to the Geologic Map of New York, Hudson-Mohawk Sheet, bedrock underlying the proposed pavilion building and ice rink playground areas is mapped as the Normanskill Shale.

The bedrock underlying the North Lake playground area, is mapped as the Germantown

Formation, consisting primarily of shale with interbeds of conglomerate and limestone.

4.2 Subsurface Stratigraphy

Subsurface conditions encountered in the borings are detailed and described on the boring logs included in Appendix B. General subsurface conditions within each proposed development area are described below in order of increasing depth BGS.

4.2.1 Pavilion Building

This section describes the subsurface conditions identified in Borings B-1 through B-4, advanced in the proposed Pavilion Building area.

Topsoil – A layer of topsoil was encountered at the ground surface in Boring B-01. The topsoil thickness was approximately 4 inches and consisted of silt and clay with sand, organic material and roots.

Asphalt – A layer of asphalt pavement was encountered at the ground surface in Borings B-03 and B-04. The asphalt thickness was approximately 7 and 4 inches in Borings B-03 and B-04, respectively.

CHA PROJECT NUMBER 106348.000

Fill – Fill material was encountered in Boring B-03, immediately below the asphalt pavement and extended to an approximate depth of 2.5 feet BGS. The fill consisted of gray and black silt and clay, fine to coarse sand and fine gravel. Uncorrected Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N-value was 7 blows per foot, indicating medium stiff consistency.

Clay and Silt – A clay and Silt stratum was encountered beneath the topsoil, asphalt and fill in borings B-01 through B-04. This stratum was approximately 6 to 19 feet thick. This stratum consisted of clay and silt with minor amounts of sand and fine gravel. Uncorrected SPT N-values ranged from 1 to 22 blows per foot, indicating very soft to very stiff consistency. The average SPT

N-value was 9 blows per foot, indicating stiff consistency.

Glacial Till – A glacial till stratum was encountered below the clay and silt stratum in borings B-03 and B-04. This stratum was about 4 to 6 feet thick and consisted of varying amounts of fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse gravel, clay and silt. The uncorrected SPT N-values ranged from 30 blows per foot to sampler refusal (greater than 50 blows per foot), indicating dense to very dense soil conditions.

Completely/Highly Weathered Rock – Completely and/or Highly weathered rock was encountered beneath the clay and silt or glacial till in Borings B-01, B-02 and B-04, starting from approximate depth of 12 to 19 feet BGS. Samples recovered from this stratum consisted predominantly of a mixture of fine to coarse sand, fine too coarse gravel, silt and clay and shale fragments.

Uncorrected SPT N-values ranged from 33 blows per foot to sampler refusal.

4.2.2 Ice Rink Playground

This section describes the subsurface conditions identified in Boring B-7, advanced in the proposed Ice Rink playground area.

Topsoil – A layer of topsoil was encountered at the ground surface boring B-07. The topsoil thickness was approximately 2 inches and consisted of silt and clay with sand, organic material and roots.

Fill – Fill material was encountered in Boring B-07 immediately below the topsoil and extended to an approximate depth of 1.5 feet BGS. The fill consisted of fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse gravel, silt mixed with ash. Uncorrected SPT N-value was 11 blows per foot, indicating medium compact density.

Clay and Silt – A clay and Silt stratum was encountered beneath the topsoil and fill in boring B-

07. This stratum extended to boring termination of 16 feet BGS. This stratum consisted of clay and silt with minor amounts of sand and fine gravel. Uncorrected SPT N-values ranged from 5 to

CHA PROJECT NUMBER 106348.000

32 blows per foot, indicating medium stiff to hard consistency. The average SPT N-value was 16 blows per foot, indicating very stiff consistency.

4.2.3 North Lake Playground

This section describes the subsurface conditions identified in Borings B-8 through B-11, advanced in the proposed North Lake playground and stormwater management facility area.

Topsoil – A layer of topsoil was encountered at the ground surface in borings B-08 through B-11.

The topsoil thickness was approximately 2 to 4 inches and consisted of silt and clay with sand, organic material and roots.

Fill – Fill material was encountered in Boring B-10 immediately below the topsoil and extended to an approximate depth of 4 feet BGS. The fill consisted of fine to coarse sand, silt and clay, fine to coarse gravel mixed with roots and brick. Uncorrected SPT N-values were 6 and 9 blows per foot, indicating loose density.

Sand and Gravel – A sand and gravel stratum was encountered beneath the topsoil, and/or clay and silt deposits in Borings B-08 through B-11. The thickness of this unit ranged from approximately 1 to 11 feet. The stratum generally consisted of fine- to coarse-grained sand and fine- to coarse-grained gravel with varying amounts of silt and clay.

The uncorrected SPT N-values ranged from 5 to 25 blows per foot, indicating very loose to medium dense conditions. The average SPT N value was approximately 14 blows per foot, indicating medium dense conditions.

Clay and Silt – A clay and Silt stratum was encountered beneath the topsoil, fill or sand and gravel in borings B-08, B-10 and B-11. This stratum was approximately 2 to 7 feet thick. This stratum consisted of clay and silt with minor amounts of sand and fine gravel. Uncorrected SPT N-values ranged from 0 to 14 blows per foot, indicating very soft to stiff consistency. The average SPT N-value was 8 blows per foot, indicating medium stiff consistency.

Completely Weathered Rock – Completely weathered rock was encountered beneath the sand and gravel stratum in Boring B-09, starting from approximate depth of 11 feet BGS. The Sample recovered from this stratum consisted predominantly of a mixture of fine to coarse sand, fine too coarse gravel, silt and clay. Uncorrected SPT N-value resulted in sampler refusal.

4.3 Groundwater Conditions

Groundwater levels were estimated during drilling operations based upon visual/manual observation of soil sample moisture content as indicated on the boring logs included in Appendix

B. Water was measured at a depth of about 12 feet to 14 feet BGS in borings B-01 through B-03 and at a depth of about 5 feet to 13 feet in Borings B-08, B-09, B-10 and B-11. The boreholes were only open for a short duration and seasonal factors such as temperature and precipitation affect groundwater levels. For this reason, long-term groundwater levels may differ from those described in this report.

4.4 Laboratory Test Results

Laboratory test results are summarized in Table 1, Summary of Laboratory Test Results and included in Appendix C.

5 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

The following sections outline geotechnical design recommendations for the proposed project based on the subsurface conditions encountered within the borings and proposed design described in Section 2.2.

5.1 Shallow Foundations

The proposed pavilion building and playground equipment should be supported on conventional shallow foundations bearing on structural fill or suitable natural medium to stiff clay and silt soils prepared in accordance with the recommendations contained herein.

The top 2 feet of soil and other materials at existing grade within the proposed pavilion building footprint are generally not suitable for foundation support and should be completely removed prior to filling for the foundations and building. This excavation should be replaced, and the grades should be raised within the building footprint and foundation zone of influence using compacted structural fill. The structural fill should extend laterally from the edge of the footings a distance equal to one half the vertical thickness of the fill below the footings as shown on Figure 3, Limits of Structural Fill Detail.

Spread footings founded on compacted structural fill or suitable natural medium to stiff clay and silt should be designed using a maximum net allowable bearing pressure of 3 ksf.

Based on our evaluations and the information obtained during the subsurface exploration and the recommendations outlined in this report, the anticipated total foundation settlement will be less than 1-inch with differential settlement of about ½ inch or less across individual column lines.

These estimates assume that proper site preparation and construction monitoring is performed and that foundations are designed based on the recommendations in this report.

Exterior foundations and interior foundations in unheated space should be founded at a minimum depth of 4 feet below finished grade to provide frost protection. Isolated footings should be a minimum of 36 inches in the least dimension and continuous strip footings should be a minimum of 18 inches wide. Foundation excavations should be backfilled with structural fill in accordance with Section 5.7 - Structural Fill to provide uniform slab support.

Foundations should be constructed as soon as possible after excavation to minimize the risk of disturbance to the bearing surface by exposure to precipitation or other adverse conditions.

Footing subgrade should be protected from freezing during construction. Any disturbed, frozen, or softened subgrade soil should be removed and replaced with structural fill as required to minimize detrimental impacts to foundation performance.

The natural clay soils are moisture sensitive and prone to disturbance when wet or when exposed to excessive foot traffic. In areas where foundation excavation expose natural clayey soils, to protect the footing subgrade and to provide a stable working surface a minimum of 6-inches of crushed stone over separation geotextile fabric or a 2-inch to 3-inch concrete mud mat should be placed below the footing subgrade. The separation geotextile should be a non-woven geotextile with an AOS equal to or smaller than the U.S. Standard sieve size of 70, such as Mirafi 160N.

The crushed stone should be a 50:50 mix of NYSDOT size designations No.1 and No.2.

5.2 Retaining Walls

Building walls that retain earth and are restrained against lateral movement should be designed to resist “at-rest” earth pressures. These walls should be backfilled with compacted structural as outlined in Sections 5.1 and 5.7. The walls can then be designed based on the engineering properties of the structural fill and appropriate bearing material, as follows:

• Backfill total unit weight = 125 pcf

• Backfill internal friction angle = 32 degrees

• Coefficient of “at rest” earth pressure, Ko = 0.47

• Ultimate coefficient of Sliding (Mass concrete to structural fill foundation soil) = 0.45

• Ultimate coefficient of Sliding (Mass concrete to clay and silt foundation soil) = 0.30

Appropriate surcharge loads should be included. Drainage features should be provided in the design of the retaining walls. Proper drainage behind the wall will limit the potential for development of hydrostatic pressure behind the walls. We recommend that a 12-inch layer of drainage stone be placed immediately behind the walls

5.3 Seismic Considerations

The following seismic parameters were determined based on the subsurface conditions, our review of applicable data obtained during this project and from adjacent projects, and the site location in accordance with the ASCE 7-22 referenced by 2025 Building Code of New York:

• Site Class = D – Stiff Soil

• Ss = 0.21

• S1 = 0.053

• SMS = 0.26

• SM1 = 0.11

CHA PROJECT NUMBER 106348.000

• SDS = 0.17

• SD1 = 0.074

• SDC = B (For Risk Categories I, II and III)

A liquefaction evaluation is not required per the 2025 Building code of New York State for Seismic

Design Category B.

5.4 Floor Slabs

Concrete floor slabs on grade should bear on structural fill. Floor slabs should be designed in accordance with the following recommendations:

• A minimum of 6-inches of clean, compacted crushed stone should be placed beneath the slab to enhance support and provide a working base above the subgrade. The actual thickness of the stone layer should be based on selected design requirements. The crushed stone should consist of a 50:50 mix of NYSDOT size designations No.1 and No.2.

• The crushed stone should be kept moist, but not wet, immediately prior to the concrete slab-on-grade floor placement.

• A polyethylene vapor barrier should be used between the crushed stone and the concrete slab in areas where the slab will be covered with materials which may be adversely affected by moisture.

• If a polyethylene vapor barrier is used, adequate curing procedures should be specified to prevent slab curling due to excess moisture loss in the slab surface.

5.5 Groundwater and Groundwater Control

A groundwater elevation of 268 feet is recommended for design of the pavilion building. A groundwater elevation of 372 feet is recommended for design at the North Lake playground.

Based on the groundwater level observations made during the subsurface exploration summarized in Section 4.3 – Groundwater Conditions, it is anticipated that groundwater will not be encountered for the pavilion building. Groundwater may be encountered during foundation construction for the North Lake playground. Project specifications should require that groundwater always be maintained at a minimum depth of 2 feet below the bottom of foundation excavations for dry and stable conditions. It should be the responsibility of the Contractor to determine appropriate dewatering methods and to maintain dry conditions for foundation construction.

5.6 Site Preparation

The area within the proposed construction footprints should be stripped of vegetation and topsoil to the top of inorganic soil. The top 2 feet of soil and other materials at existing grade within the proposed pavilion building footprint should be stripped prior to fill placement and other construction. After stripping the site and excavating to planned grades, the exposed subgrade beneath the proposed structure should be proof rolled using a smooth drum roller with a static weight of 10 tons. The roller should operate in vibratory mode and complete at least 6 passes over the subgrade at a speed not exceeding 3 fps. Any areas that pump or weave during proof rolling should be undercut a minimum of 12 inches and stabilized. If the vibratory tends to “bring up” moisture, the subgrade should be proof rolled with the roller operating in static mode.

5.7 Structural Fill

Structural fill shall be used for backfilling undercuts and raising grades within the pavilion building footprint and for backfilling foundation excavations. Structural fill should consist of sound, durable, non-plastic sand and gravel, free of stumps, roots, organics, and any frozen or deleterious materials. Structural fill shall conform to the gradation requirements in Table 5.7-1.

Table 5.7-1. Gradation Requirements for Structural Fill

Sieve Size Percent Passing by Weight

4-inch 100

No. 40 0 to 70

No. 200 0 to 10

The on-site fine-grained soils do not meet the gradation requirements of structural fill. The suitability of on-site soil for re-use as fill should be evaluated based on bulk sampling and laboratory testing of the material.

Structural fill shall be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum laboratory dry density as determined by the modified Proctor test (ASTM D-1557). Actual lift thickness should be based on the type of compaction equipment used during construction.

6 EXCAVATIONS

All excavations should be performed in accordance with OSHA standards and other applicable

State and Federal regulations. In areas where sufficient sloping of excavation is not possible, the excavation should be shored, sheeted, and braced. All temporary excavation support systems should be designed by a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of New York

7 OBSERVATION DURING CONSTRUCTION

A qualified geotechnical engineer should carefully inspect subgrade preparation, fill placement operations and the final excavation surface for foundations to ascertain that the subgrade has been properly prepared. The inspection of the subgrade should include evaluation of the soil to confirm that the soil is suitable for construction of the foundations.

All fill should be tested by a qualified soils laboratory to verify it meets the specified gradation and to determine their maximum dry density for compaction. In-place density tests should be performed to verify that compaction methods and equipment achieve the required densities.

8 CLOSURE

The geotechnical recommendations presented in this report are based, in part, on project and subsurface information available at the time this report was prepared and in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Some variation of subsurface conditions may occur between locations explored that may not become evident until construction. Depending on the nature and extent of the variations, it may be necessary to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report.

CHA does not accept responsibility for designs based upon our recommendations unless we are engaged to review the final plans and specifications to determine whether any changes in the project affect the validity of our recommendations and whether our recommendations have been properly implemented in the design.

This report has been prepared solely for design purposes and shall not be incorporated by reference or other means in the Contract Documents. If this report is included in the Contract

Documents, it shall be for information only. Specifications shall take precedence.

9 REFERENCES

Cadwell, D.H., et.al. Surficial Geologic Map of New York. New York State Museum, 1991.

Rickard, L.V., et. al. Geologic Map of New York. New York State Museum and Science Service, 1970.

TABLES

Table 1 – Summary of Laboratory Test Results

Boring ID Sample

No.

Depth (feet)

Elevation (feet)

Grain Size Analysis Atterberg Limits Moisture content (%)

Unconfined Compressive Strength (PSI) %Gravel %Sand %Fine LL PL PI

B-1 S-3 4 - 6 - - - - 52 23 29 27 - B-1 S-6 14 - 16 - - - - 33 19 14 35 - B-2 S-2 2 - 4 - - - - - - - 29 - B-2 S-6 14 - 16 - - - - 33 18 15 31 - B-3 S-5 8 - 10 - - - - - - - 27 - B-6B R-1 7 - 12 - - - - - - - - 1,150 B-10 S-4 6 - 8 - 0 11 89 - - - 20 - B-11 S-3 4 - 6 - 40 46 14 - - - 11 -

FIGURES

PAVILION BUILDING AND

ICE RINK PLAYGROUND

SITE LOCATION

NORTH LAKE PLAYGROUND

SITE LOCATION

SOURCE: U.S.G.S. 7.5' Topographic

QUADRANGLE: TROY SOUTH, NY

SCALE: 1"=2000'

PROJECT NO.

Drawing Copyright © 2026

518.453.4500 . www.chasolutions.com Albany, NY 12205-0269

III Winners Circle, PO Box 5269

106348

FREAR PARK

COMPLEX IMPROVEMENTS

TROY, NEW YORK

B+Z

B

MINIMUM LIMITS OF

STRUCTURAL FILL

2V:1H 2V:1H

Z

FOUNDATION

B x L

UNSUITABLE

MATERIAL

SUITABLE

BEARING

MATERIAL

PROJECT NO.

Drawing Copyright © 2026

518.453.4500 . www.chasolutions.com Albany, NY 12205-0269

III Winners Circle, PO Box 5269

106348

FREAR PARK

COMPLEX IMPROVEMENTS

TROY, NEW YORK 63

APPENDIX A

Photographs

Drilling operations at boring B-2 (facing south).

Drilling operations at boring B-3 (facing northwest).

Frear Park Complex Improvements Troy, New York

CHA Project Number 106348.000 July 2026

1.

2.

Rock coring at boring B-6B (facing southwest).

Drilling operations at boring B-9 (facing west).

CHA Project Number 106348.000 July 2026

3.

4.

Installation of infiltration test IT-10 (facing northwest).

View of completed and backfilled boring B-10 and infiltration test IT-10 (facing west).

5.

6.

7 - Rock Core Photograph

Boring No.

Run Depth (ft) Recover y (in.)

Recovery

RQD

(in)

RQD

Rock Type Box Row

B-6B R-1 7 – 12 53/60 88 40 60 Shale 1

Notes

1. Box row corresponds to the core box section in which the rock core sample is contained.

2. The above photograph shows the core sample in dry condition.

APPENDIX B

Boring Logs

SA

M

P.

A

DV

LE

N C

O

RE

"N

VA

LU

E

SA

M

PL

E

G

RA

PH

IC

S

DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION

S1

R1

2.0

2.0

1.8

2.0

2-3-4-5

N/A

88%

f. SAND , Some Silt, trace f. gravel, brown, loose, moist (SM)

LEGEND TO SUBSURFACE LOGS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 131210 or R

Q D%

(f t)(f t)

Drawing Copyright © 2025

REMARKS ON

CHARACTER

OF DRILLING,

WATER

RETURN, ETC

BLOWS PER 6"

ON SPLIT

SPOON

SAMPLER

WATER

LEVELS

AND/OR

WELL DATAEL

EV

AT

IO

N (F ee t)

DE

PT

H (F ee t)

SA

M

P.

/C

O

RE

N U

M

BE

R

RE

CO

VE

RY

(f t)

Mica SCHIST , gray, soft, slightly weathered, closely fractured, good

RQD

Subsurface Logs present material classifications, test data, and observations from subsurface investigations at the subject site as reported by the inspecting geologist or engineer. In some cases, the classifications may be made based on laboratory test data when available. It should be noted that the investigation procedures only recover a small portion of the subsurface materials at the site.

Therefore, actual conditions between borings and sampled intervals may differ from those presented on the Subsurface Logs. The information presented on the logs provide a basis for an evaluation of the subsurface conditions and may indicate the need for additional exploration. Any evaluation of the conditions reported on the logs must be performed by Professional Engineers or Geologists.

1. SAMP./CORE NUMBER - Samples are numbered for identification on containers, laboratory reports or in text reports.

2. SAMP.ADV/LEN.CORE - Length of sampler advance or length of coring run measured in feet.

3. RECOVERY - Amount of sample actually recovered after withdrawing sampler or core barrel from bore hole measured in feet.

4. SAMPLE BLOWS/6" - Unless otherwise noted, blow counts represent values obtained by driving a 2.0" (O.D.), 1-3/8" (I.D.) split spoon sampler into the subsurface strata with a 140 pound weight falling 30" as per ASTM International D1586. After an initial penetration of 6" to seat the sampler into undisturbed material, the sampler is then driven an additional 2 or 3 six inch increments. Refusal is defined as a resistance greater than 50 blows per 6" of penetration.

5. "N" Value or RQD % - "N" VALUE - The sum of the second and third sample blow increments is generally termed the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) "N" value. Refusal (R) is defined as a resistance greater than 50 blows for 6 inches of penetration. CORE RQD - Core Rock Quality Designation, RQD, is defined as the summed length of all pieces of core equal to or longer than 4 inches divided by the total length of the coring run. Fresh, irregular breaks distinguishable as being caused by drilling or recovery operations are ignored and the pieces are counted as intact lengths. RQD values are valid only for cores obtained with NX size core barrels.

6. SAMPLE - Graphical presentation of sample type and advance or core run length. See Table 1.

7. DEPTH - Depth as measured from the ground surface in feet.

8. GRAPHICS - Graphical presentation of subsurface materials. See Table 4. Dual soil classification and rock graphics may vary and are not shown on Table 4.

9. DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION - SOIL - Recovered samples are visually classified in the field by the supervising geologist or engineer unless otherwise noted. Particle size and plasticity classification is based on field observations, and using the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). See Table 4. USCS symbols are presented in parentheses following the soil description. Where necessary, dual symbols may be used for combinations of soil types. Relative proportions, by weight and/or plasticity, are described in general accordance with "Suggested Methods of Test for Identification of Soils" by D.M. Burmister, ASTM Special Publication 479, 6-1970. See Table 2. Soil density or consistency description is based on the penetration resistance. See Table 3.

Soil moisture description is based on the observed wetness of the soil recovered being moist or wet. Water introduced into the boring during drilling may affect the moisture content of the materials. Other geologic terms may also be used to further describe the subsurface materials. ROCK - Rock core descriptions are based on the inspector's observations and may be examined and described in greater detail by the project engineer or geologist. Terms used in the description of rock core are presented in Table 5.

10. DIVISION LINES - Division lines between deposits are based on field observations and changes in recovered material. Solid lines depict contacts between two deposits of different geologic depositional environment of known elevation. Dashed lines represent estimated elevation of contacts between two deposits of different geologic depositional environment. Dotted lines depict transitions of deposits within the same depositional environment, such as grain size or density.

11. ELEVATION - Elevation of strata changes in feet.

12. REMARKS - Miscellaneous observations.

13. WATER LEVELS & WELL DATA - Hollow water level symbol, if present, represents level at which first saturated sample or water level was encountered. Solid water level symbol, if present, depicts the most probable static water elevation at the time of drilling or as measured in an installed observation well at a later date. Subsurface water conditions are influenced by factors such as precipitation, stratigraphic composition, and drilling/coring methods. Conditions at other times may differ from those described on the logs. For graphical presentation of observation/monitoring well construction, see Table 6. Elevations of changes in construction are noted at the bottom of each section.

SCREENED PVC PIPE

WASHED SAND

WASHED SAND

STAINLESS STEEL

SCREENED PIPE

SOLID PVC PIPE

Very Hard Hard Med. Hard Soft

ROCK CLASSIFICATION TERMS

TABLE 5

HARDNESS:

Very Soft Carves Grooves with knife Scratched easily with knife Scatched with difficulty Cannot be scratched with knife

Slight or no staining of fractures, little or no discoloration, few fractures.

Fractures stained, discoloration may extend into rock 1", some soil in fractures.

Significant portions of rock stained and discolored, soil in fractures, loss of strength.

Entire rock discolored and dull except quartz grains, severe loss of strength.

Weathered to a residual soil.

Fresh

Slightly

Moderately

Highly

Complete

WEATHERING:

Massive/V. Wide Thick/Wide Med./Med.

Thin/Close V. Thin/V. Close

> 6' 2' - 6'

8" - 24" 2 1/2" - 8"

< 2 1/2" < 25% 25% - 50% 51% - 75% 76% - 90%

> 90%

V. Poor Poor Fair Good Excellent

RQD:

TABLE 6

WELL CONSTRUCTION

CEMENT GROUT

BENTONITE/

NATURAL SOIL/

BENTONITE PLUG

ROCK FILL

Poorly graded sand, sand & gravel mix.

Sand and silt mix.

Sand and clay mix.

Inorganic clay, low plasticity.

Organic silt/clay, low plasticity.

Inorganic silt, high plasticity.

Inorganic clay, high plasticity.

Organic silt/clay, high plasticity.

Peat and other highly organic soils.

Miscellaneous fill materials.

CO

AR

SE

G

RA

IN

ED

S

O

IL

S

FI

N E

G

RA

IN

ED

S O

IL

S

GRAVEL

SAND

SILT & CLAY

ORGANIC SOILS

FILL

Coarse:3"-3/4" Fine:3/4"-#4

Classification based on > 50% being gravel

Coarse:#4-#10 Med.:#10-#40 Fine:#40-#200

Classification based on > 50% being sand

Classification based on > 50% passing #200 sieve.

USCS CLASSIFICATION, PARTICLE SIZE, & GRAPHICS

TABLE 4

Hard> 30

ConsistencyBlows/ft.

< 2 2-4 5-8 9-15 16-30

Very Soft Soft Med. Stiff Stiff Very StiffVery Compact

Compact Med. Compact Loose Very Loose

> 50 31-50 11-30 5-10 < 5

DENSITY/CONSISTENCY

TABLE 3

GRANULAR SOILS

Blows/ft.

COHESIVE SOILS

Density

TYPICAL SAMPLE TYPES

TABLE 1

(1 3/8" I.D.)

AUGER SAMPLE

ROCK CORE

NX SIZE

SPLIT SPOON

< 10% 10% - 20% 20% - 35% 35% - 50%

OF SAMPLE

PERCENTAGE

"trace" "little" "some" "and"

ADJECTIVE

TABLE 2

SAMPLE MATERIAL PROPORTIONS

LEGEND TO SUBSURFACE LOGS

"UNDISTURBED"

SHELBY TUBE

FINE GRAINED

MAJOR PARTICLE

SIZE DIVISION SYMBOL

USCS GENERAL

DESCRIPTION

Well graded gravels, gravel & sand mix.

Poorly graded gravels, gravel & sand mix.

Gravel, sand and silt mix.

clay mix.

Gravel, sand and

Well graded sand, sand & gravel mix.

Inorganic silt, low plasticity.

FRACTURE SPACING:

Massive Thick Medium Thin < 4"

4" - 12" 12' - 40"

> 40"

BEDDING:

AIR ENTRAINED

CEMENT

SW

SC

ML

CH

CL

SP

Fill

Pt

GW

GP

MH

GM

GC

SM

OL

OH

Drawing Copyright © 2025

GRAPHIC

SYMBOL

Standard split spoon samples may not recover particles with any dimension larger than 1 3/8".

Therefore, reported gravel percentages may not reflect actual conditions.

D ep th (ft

Samples

No.

Sy m bo ls

R Q

D

R ec ov er y Le ng th

(in

S-1 S 14

S-2 S 15

S-3 S 18

S-4 S 24

S-5 S 19

S-6 S 24

S-7 S 13

SP

T Bl ow

C…